Legal claims defining the scope of protection. Each claim is shown in both the original legal language and a plain English translation.
1. A method of controlling a primary microprocessor assumption of control of a device in a multi-channel control device comprising the steps of: entering a control process in one of two possible control states, wherein said two possible control states are a primary microprocessor in-control state and a primary microprocessor not in-control state; evaluating a plurality of conditions dependent upon which of said possible control states is true by evaluating a first set of conditions when said control process is in the primary microprocessor in-control state and a second set of conditions when said control process is in the primary microprocessor not in-control state; said second set of conditions includes at least four conditions and corresponds to the primary microprocessor not in-control state; a first condition of the at least four conditions is met when a remote channel is channel-in-control, a remote primary microprocessor controller is in-control, or the primary microprocessor controller has been in-control within a set time period and wherein said first condition of the at least four conditions has a highest priority; a second condition of the at least four conditions is met when a back-up microprocessor controller is in-control and the remote channel is not channel-in-control, wherein the second condition of the at least four conditions has a second highest priority; a third condition of the at least four conditions is met when the primary microprocessor controller has a better health than a latest determined remote primary microprocessor controller health, wherein the third condition of the at least four conditions has a third highest priority; a fourth condition of the at least four conditions is met when each of the first, second, and third condition of the at least four conditions is not met; entering one of a plurality of actions based on said evaluating of said plurality of conditions, wherein said plurality of actions includes an is channel-in-control output signal wrap-around false check, a take/keep control action, and a give-up control action; and performing an action in response to entering said one of said plurality of actions.
In a multi-channel control system with a primary and backup microprocessor controlling a device, this method manages when the primary microprocessor takes control. The control process operates in two states: primary in-control and primary not in-control. Depending on the current state, different conditions are evaluated. When the primary microprocessor is not in control, at least four prioritized conditions are checked. The highest priority condition checks if a remote channel or microprocessor is in control, or if the primary microprocessor was recently in control. Lower priority conditions check if the backup is in control, or if the primary's "health" is better than the remote's. Based on these conditions, one of several actions occurs: a fault check for channel control, taking/keeping control, or giving up control. The system then performs the selected action.
2. The method of claim 1 , wherein said method enters the give-up control action when said first, second, or fourth condition of the at least four conditions is met and wherein said method undergoes a delay and enters the take/keep control action when the third condition of the at least four conditions is met.
This method for controlling a primary microprocessor assumption of control of a device in a multi-channel control device, as described previously, enters a control process in either a primary microprocessor in-control state or a primary microprocessor not in-control state. When the system evaluates conditions and the first, second, or fourth condition of the at least four conditions is met – where the first condition is met when a remote channel is channel-in-control, a remote primary microprocessor controller is in-control, or the primary microprocessor controller has been in-control within a set time period; the second condition is met when a back-up microprocessor controller is in-control and the remote channel is not channel-in-control; and the fourth condition is met when none of the other conditions are met – the system enacts a give-up control action. However, if the third condition (primary microprocessor having better health than the latest remote) is met, the system delays and then performs a take/keep control action.
3. A method of controlling a primary microprocessor assumption of control of a device in a multi-channel control device comprising the steps of: entering a control process in one of two possible control states, wherein said two possible control states are a primary microprocessor in-control state and a primary microprocessor not in-control state; evaluating a plurality of conditions dependent upon which of said possible control states is true; entering one of a plurality of actions based on said evaluating of said plurality of conditions, wherein said plurality of actions includes an is channel-in-control output signal wrap-around false check, a take/keep control action, and a give-up control action; and performing an action in response to entering said one of said plurality of actions, said action comprising at least one of setting a channel-in-control output wrap-around fault flag as true and setting the primary microprocessor as not in-control in response to said is channel-in-control output signal wrap-around false check returning positive.
In a multi-channel control system with primary/backup microprocessors controlling a device, this method manages primary microprocessor control. The control process can be in either a "primary in-control" or "primary not in-control" state. Depending on the current state, different conditions are evaluated. Based on these conditions, one of several actions is chosen: checking for a false "channel-in-control" signal, taking/keeping control, or giving up control. If the "channel-in-control" check returns a positive result (indicating a fault), the system sets a fault flag to "true" and sets the primary microprocessor as "not in-control".
4. The method of claim 3 , wherein the step of performing an action in response to entering said one of said plurality of actions further comprises setting the primary microprocessor as in-control in response to entering the take/keep control action.
This method for controlling a primary microprocessor assumption of control of a device in a multi-channel control device, as described previously, enters a control process in either a primary microprocessor in-control state or a primary microprocessor not in-control state. If the system evaluates conditions, chooses an action, and decides on a take/keep control action, the primary microprocessor is set to an in-control state.
5. The method of claim 3 , wherein the step of performing an action in response to entering said one of said plurality of actions further comprises setting the primary microprocessor as not in-control in response to entering the give-up control action.
This method for controlling a primary microprocessor assumption of control of a device in a multi-channel control device, as described previously, enters a control process in either a primary microprocessor in-control state or a primary microprocessor not in-control state. If the system evaluates conditions, chooses an action, and decides on a give-up control action, the primary microprocessor is set to an not-in-control state.
6. The method of claim 3 , further comprising the step of prioritizing each condition within said plurality of conditions such that when a higher priority condition is met, a corresponding action is taken regardless of whether any lower priority conditions are met.
This method for controlling a primary microprocessor assumption of control of a device in a multi-channel control device, as described previously, enters a control process in either a primary microprocessor in-control state or a primary microprocessor not in-control state. Each condition within the plurality of conditions is assigned a priority. Therefore, if a higher priority condition is met during condition evaluation, the corresponding action is taken, regardless of whether any lower priority conditions are also met. This ensures that critical conditions trigger immediate and appropriate responses, overriding less important considerations.
Unknown
September 26, 2017
Browse 5M+ US patents with plain-English claim translations and AI-generated analysis.